ReviewInternational journal of nanomedicine2026
Hydrogel-Based Monitoring in Perioperative Anesthesia: A Conceptual Review and Translational Perspective.
Review in International journal of nanomedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perioperative anesthesia monitoring increasingly extends beyond intermittent vital-sign measurements to continuous assessment of bioelectrical signals, tissue-device interfaces, local pressure, wound microenvironments, and selected biochemical markers. Hydrogels are attractive soft-interface materials because their water-rich networks can combine tissue-like mechanics, adhesion, ionic or electronic conductivity, microfluidic sampling, molecular recognition, and stimulus-responsive functions. This conceptual review evaluates hydrogel-based monitoring technologies from a perioperative perspective and maps evidence from wearable bioelectronics, microneedle and interstitial-fluid sensing, smart wound care, local drug delivery, and implantable interfaces onto preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative use cases. Importantly, the current evidence base is predominantly preclinical or derived from adjacent clinical contexts; among the studies summarized, we identified no hydrogel monitoring device that has yet been prospectively evaluated in a dedicated perioperative patient cohort. Accordingly, this review distinguishes demonstrated material and device performance from proposed perioperative applications. We organize the field by dominant material-function systems rather than treating nanostructure as a standalone class, and examine soft-tissue matching, conductivity, wet adhesion, dehydration resistance, shelf life, biosensing accuracy, and device integration. We also discuss translational requirements for perioperative glycemic monitoring and AI-assisted systems, including reference-method validation, independent datasets, explainability, and Software as a Medical Device considerations. Hydrogels are therefore best viewed not as replacements for established anesthesia monitors, but as enabling interfaces that may add continuous local and molecular information. Future progress depends on standardized performance testing, storage and sterilization validation, prospective clinical studies, and regulatory-ready system integration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.